Does this book contain a fallible human interpretation of the passages in question?

If the answer is yes, how is it any close to the truth than my assessment that there is an error? If it is fallible, than it may very well not contain a valid answer.

Furthermore, did the authors of the book start out by assuming Ezekiel does not contain an error and then invent a harmony to make the apparent error go away (by the process of intelligent human invention), or did they honestly start without bias and work toward discovering the explanation that is least tedious?

I just threw away 100′s of dollars of Christian books – many of them containing commentary and interpretations that contradicted each other. How would this book differ?

I don’t want to find a resolution, I want to find the truth. There is a difference.

For starters, check out G.K. Beale’s The Temple and the Church’s Mission. It’s relatively cheap (currently ~$20 @ Amazon.com). Or, since your profile says you’re in the Chicago area, you can borrow it via a local seminary’s library (e.g. TEDS, Wheaton).

Patrick

Inerrantist view (above):

B.C: sacrifices, circumcision, and Aaronic priesthood.
A.C: no sacrifices, no circumcision, and Melchizedek priesthood through Christ.
A.C: fulfilment of B.C. prophecy in Ezekiel with reinstatement of sacrifices, circumcision, and Aaronic priesthood.

This is not a contradiction? What?

Its kind of creepy to think that Jesus will return of the Melchizedek priesthood and oversee Aaronic priests performing sacrifices symbolizing his death in a temple devoted to a God who is actually present in person and will only allow people who are circumcised to enter.

Will Jesus himself perform sacrifices to fulfill the requirements of the laws in Ezekiel? If he does not, won’t that mean he is not fulfilling all the requirements of righteousness?

Man, Jesus offering sacrifices symbolizing his death to himself so that he can fulfill all righteousness.

At least his resurrected body is already circumcised so he can enter his own temple.

http://www.thywordistrue.com/problems-problem-127.htm

And now I’m not allowed to submit any more contradictions to the site.

Hmmm….

I have no intention of “debunking” each point you bring up, because some of those sure do look like good prophecies or scientific data.

The issue is not whether the Bible is ever right, the issue is whether the Bible is ever wrong. If it is is wrong at any point, then why should we trust it at any other point?

So you either have to show that every single point in the Bible is trustworthy or I have to show only one flaw.

It would be impossible for you to show that every point is trustworthy. And even if you could show some “trustworthy” points – like you have done – there is no guarantee that this makes the Bible trustworthy. As you have said, prophecies could be post hoc. Scientific facts could be good guesses or simply people exploring different ideas.

Let me give an example. You have said that the Bible predicts atomic structure. Well, Democritus theorized this as well. Does this mean Democritus was inspired – or just was thinking?

It is not unreasonable to think that Biblical writings would have truth statements in them. This does not back up the Biblical writings as inspired, only says that smart people were thinking back then and had some good ideas.

As for the prophecies, keep in mind that I have shown one prophecy that does not make sense. If I cannot trust this prophecy, why should I trust any of them?

Let me give you another example. Matthew says that the Old Testament passage in Isaiah predicts the virgin birth. If you study the context and the Hebrew word for “virgin” (which is actually young woman, when there very well was a better word for virgin in Hebrew) it says no such thing. I know this is a “classic” example which many scholars have “explained away”, but I think it is an extremely good one.

Or how about the fact that Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch, which was rejected for inclusion with the canon and is known to be a 2nd century B.C. (approximately) fabrication? How can a book that was invented be quoted authoritatively in the New Testament as a trustworthy source? Remember, if one argues that the Old Testament books are canonical because the apostles and Jesus quoted from them, one must also conclude the same thing about the Book of Enoch. I can see no way around this without equivocating.

And to be honest, even if the Bible was not inspired, one would expect to find fulfilled prophecies. Why? Because most of the prophecies were vague enough (“this nation will be destroyed by this king”, “a child will be born to this woman”, etc.) to be fulfilled no matter what.

Think about it. The restoration of Israel was somewhat a self-fulfilling prophecy. People in that area of the world are being displanted all the time for religious reasons and are always trying to get that land back. Given the ferver of the Jewish religion, they would want that land back and fight for it. This was entirely because of hard human effort – not because of fulfilled prophecy.

Now, if there was a prophecy in the New Testament which predicted the century in which the people would return and the name of their leader – that would be incredible. But it doesn’t. One just has to infer that they would get their nation back because some of the prophecies include Israel as a nation. But what is so incredible about that?

Jesus said that “all these things” would take place in “this generation”. Did they? Paul says “we who remain” Did Paul remain?

You can argue context and “proper interpretation” left and right but I do not see a way around these types of errors without inventing explanations which are not provided by the Bible itself. And if we invent explanations, why not just assume the original authors of the Bible were just doing the exact same thing themselves?

Isaiah’s Prophecy of Cyrus. One of the most fascinating of the Bible’s many fulfilled prophesies is Isaiah’s prophesy naming Cyrus as the king who will permit the temple and the city of Jerusalem to be rebuilt (Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1). At the time of Isaiah’s prediction (approximately 700 B.C.) the city and the temple didn’t need to be rebuilt because they were still standing (they were destroyed in 586 B.C by the Babylonians)! However, in approximately 539 B.C. a Persian king by the name of Cyrus conquered Babylon and decreed that the Jews could return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. So, in essence, Isaiah predicted that a man named Cyrus, to be born over a hundred years later, would issue the command to rebuild the temple which would not be destroyed until over a hundred years later! Once again the odds of this prediction coming true by random chance are too astronomical to even consider.

And as I already stated, “The Jews began to go back to their land May 14, 1948. This is the first “ressurection” of dead nation in history, thus fulfilling prophecy. That was a good guess for those guys who wrote the Bible wasn’t it.”

Jeremiah 29:14, “And I will be found of you, saith the LORD: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the LORD; and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive.”

Isaiah 11:11, “And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.”

(More could be provided)

As far as the scientific accuracies:
1. Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of invisible atoms.
Hebrews 11:3, “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

2. Medical science has only recently discovered that blood-clotting in a newborn reaches its peak on the eighth day, then drops. The Bible consistently says that a baby must be circumcised on the eighth day: Leviticus 12:3, “And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.”

3. At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant (1500 B.C.), the Bible spoke of the earth’s free float in space: Job 26:7, “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, [and] hangeth the earth upon nothing.”

4. The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the earth is round: [It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. (Isaiah 40:22). Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later.

5. Solomon described a “cycle” of air currents two thousand years before scientists “discovered” them. Ecclesiastes 1:6, “The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.”

6. Luke 17:34–36 says the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will occur while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night at the same time.

These are just a few. If you google in scientific accuracies of the Bible it will reveal a ton of information. Having gave these few accuracies I do want people to realize that the Bible is not a science text book, but where it speaks about science, it is accurate.